Today, most policymakers and accountability systems focus solely on academic measures when discussing college and career readiness. Despite this focus, the current review shows that ACT has long supported a variety of assessments to address the multidimensional nature of college and career readiness. Each assessment was developed to be appropriate at a specific developmental stage for students and adults as they prepare for high school, postsecondary, and career opportunities and success. The assessments, some of which we have briefly described, cross all four broad domains associated with college and career readiness. However, these assessments were developed without the benefit of a unified and comprehensive model of education and work success. Research has demonstrated that different constructs are relevant for different outcomes, with some predictors demonstrating stronger predictive validity for specific criteria (e.g., first-year grades, retention to sophomore year, engagement at a college, time to graduation [Camara, 2005]). The purpose of this report is to discuss and describe how a broad range of factors contribute to navigating the various transitions along the K-Career continuum and to provide early indications of a broader definition of college and career readiness.

An assessment system should be guided by a research-based model in that it requires a systematic understanding and specification of how constructs across different broad domains are related and to what extent they determine or predict success related to the various outcomes of interest that all fall under the common reference of education and work success. One specific objective of this report is to articulate both an overall model of education and work readiness and more detailed models articulating constructs from each broad domain salient for predicting success for specific outcomes. Research clearly shows that many cognitive constructs predict outcomes such as academic grades and persistence (retention, time to graduation) in academic environments (Bowen & Bok, 1998; Sackett, Borneman, & Connelly, 2008), but it also shows that additional constructs contribute uniquely in predicting success across different outcomes. Many students who drop out of college do so not because of a lack of academic preparedness but rather due to a range of other factors, such as choosing a major that is a poor fit, having poor study/time-management skills, lacking clear academic goals, or having low academic self-efficacy (e.g., Allen & Robbins, 2010; Credé & Kuncel, 2008; Nye et al., 2012; Robbins et al., 2004). If we continue to ignore these additional characteristics in models of readiness, we will fail to identify many at-risk students who thus may not receive the interventions or support they need to get on track for success.

This report represents another step in an ongoing effort to build an expanded framework of readiness and success: what people need to know and be able to do in order to achieve education and work success. ACT began work in this area many years ago. The ACT College Readiness Benchmarks were developed to articulate the level of core academic skills a student needs to have a high probability of success in specific first-year college courses. The ACT College Readiness Benchmarks and the corresponding ACT College and Career Readiness Standards have been back-mapped to ACT Plan, ACT Explore, and ACT Aspire, allowing for the articulation of what students need to know and be able to do academically at several key transitions along the K–Career continuum. Such information can be used to assess whether a student is on track for college and career readiness. There has been substantial progress since ACT originally developed the ACT College Readiness Benchmarks and the ACT College and Career Readiness Standards (ACT, 2004; 2007). Our understanding and measurement of readiness for education and work success has advanced, and it is now clear that a more holistic approach holds a great deal of promise. To support this holistic approach, ACT is building a comprehensive framework with the goal of articulating what people need to know and be able to do in each of the four broad domains at each of the key transitions across the K–Career continuum.

To take full advantage of the emerging knowledge in this area, development of this framework is based on a comprehensive review of relevant theory, education and work standards, empirical research, input from experts in the field, and a variety of other sources for each of four broad domains.1 The framework spans the K–Career continuum, since the precursors of success emerge very early in life and development continues well beyond the confines of traditional secondary and postsecondary education. To describe what people need to know and be able to do across this continuum, both the education and work readiness framework and the associated model of success are defined in terms of critical transitions. These transitions differ slightly across the four broad domains, but some major transitions are relevant to all four. For example, to make a successful transition from elementary school to middle school, students need a variety of knowledge and skills from all four broad domains (see Figure 1).

For each of these transitions, the framework describes what individuals need to know and be able to do to be successful. A hierarchical taxonomy within each broad domain organizes the more specific dimensions and the knowledge and skills and provides a common language for describing the precursors of success. The focus is ultimately on knowledge, behaviors, and skills because these are amenable to change. Thus, the taxonomy is well positioned to inform education and other interventions aimed at helping people achieve education and workplace success. Because the taxonomy is holistic and comprehensive, it can be used to identify new ways to assess and improve education and workplace readiness. The taxonomy is intended to provide a road map for students, teachers, and other stakeholders. It also begins to highlight how skills build over time and the similarities and differences in the skills required across the life span. For example, we know that much of the knowledge and many of the skills in the achievement domain are part of learning progressions that develop over time. Students must have a fundamental understanding of addition and subtraction before learning higher-order mathematical concepts like algebra. Likewise, one must possess a good deal of prerequisite mathematical knowledge to be in a position to learn calculus. Similar developmental considerations are important for the other broad domains as well.  For example, in the navigation domain, students need to have a good understanding of what they know, what they are able to do, and what they like and value before they are in a position to make an informed decision about selecting a major or occupation that would be a good fit. The framework clearly emphasizes the developmental nature of these broad domains, where some constructs are likely to be more or less important at different transitions and are manifested differently over time.